60 MPH Limit on Motorways

[Laird Scooby]

Out of those people that think dropping the motorway speed limit to 60mph is a good idea how many of them would still vote for it if they were told it also meant they could no longer use air travel?

[pinballdave]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

Out of those people that think dropping the motorway speed limit to 60mph is a good idea how many of them would still vote for it if they were told it also meant they could no longer use air travel?

It's not really an applicable comparison. They're still allowing you to use a car, just at a slightly reduced speed for what will probably be a short part of your journey, so why do you think they will want a complete ban on air travel?

I'd be happy to accept some air travel restrictions, or allow everyone a couple of cheap annual holiday flights and then heavily tax the frequent fliers. I'd also be fine with measures to discourage flights where there's a reasonable alternative, ie flying London-Paris rather than eurostar and the same with some internal flights if HS2 gets finished. I wouldn't ban long haul flights where the alternative is several weeks at sea.

That's why this lowering of speed limits is a trial. If it actually improves air quality in these areas, then can you argue that your 'right' to drive fast is really more important to the nation than the rights of the people who live alongside the motorway not to be poisoned by your exhaust fumes?

I appreciate that I have my own biasses for this issue, I have reached the stage of my life where I have learnt to arrange my schedules so that it is very rare for me to need to rush around to meet deadlines, so this is unlikely to effect me personally.

Which ever way this one goes, I don't think anyone will be taking much notice of the 'Wah! Wah! I wanna drive fast' brigade, or the self-induced paranoia of the 'they're coming for our freedoms' attitudes posted here, in the same way as the eco-nutters who want the motorways converted into cycle lanes will be similarly (and rightly) ignored.

[biggbn]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

Out of those people that think dropping the motorway speed limit to 60mph is a good idea how many of them would still vote for it if they were told it also meant they could no longer use air travel?

No problems here if air travel was severely curtailed

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by pinballdave

It's not really an applicable comparison.

You're half right, it's not a comparison at all! It was a simple question.

Originally Posted by biggbn

No problems here if air travel was severely curtailed

Allelujah! I was fairly certain you'd get it George! Glad you proved me right too!

The point is, go back to when the global lockdown first started and air travel was severely curtailed (good choice of words George! ) our air pollution levels dropped radically.

Nothing to do with reduced car usage although that just increased the effect.

Think back to the Norwegian Volcano which caused a global no-fly zone.

Almost overnight there was a dramatic improvement in air quality, even in cities where pollution had been a problem from vehicles.
Even the weather improved instantly, not a coincidence but because the weather systems up in the sky weren't being disrupted the way they normally are with all the aircraft flying around.
Yes the planet is tilting closer to the sun at the moment which is also giving strange weather phenomena (snow in Australia for example) but take 90% on the aircraft out of the sky and pollution globally will be reduced radically almost instantly.

This will have other knock-on benefits too. For example, it will make it harder for viruses from abroad to travel back to the UK to a populus that isn't used to them and have little or no resistance to them. Don't forget this is a two-way thing, viruses common here but not in other countries won't be able to travel so quickly and easily to those countries either.

Freddie Laker has a lot to answer for!

The whole point of this apparent digression is that the 60mph limit is nothing more than virtue signalling. It is the govt doing "something" to say they're "tackling pollution" but it's nothing more than smoke and mirrors and a further incursion on our freedom.

[pinballdave]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

The whole point of this apparent digression is that the 60mph limit is nothing more than virtue signalling. It is the govt doing "something" to say they're "tackling pollution" but it's nothing more than smoke and mirrors and a further incursion on our freedom.

But it is something that can be done without causing irreparable harm to our economy or way of life, and is very likely to be beneficial to the people living near pollution hot-spots on the motorway network. OK, it might cause you some minor inconvenience, but if it's for the greater good, then I would be willing to accept that.

Like it or not, we are now a global species, and a complete ban on air travel (and air freight) would severely affect the lives of the majority of the population of this planet. I doubt that even the extinction rebellion marchers would go that far.

Hopefully more extreme environmental measures to tackle transportation related pollution will not be necessary. Covid has taught us that we don't always need to be seated at a desk in an office, we can meet and conclude business deals online and don't need to fly across the world just to shake hands, and there are actually some fairly nice places to holiday in the UK, so perhaps there will be a long term reduction in commuting and flights without having to penalise those that need to travel.

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by pinballdave

But it is something that can be done without causing irreparable harm to our economy or way of life, and is very likely to be beneficial to the people living near pollution hot-spots on the motorway network. OK, it might cause you some minor inconvenience, but if it's for the greater good, then I would be willing to accept that.

Like it or not, we are now a global species, and a complete ban on air travel (and air freight) would severely affect the lives of the majority of the population of this planet. I doubt that even the extinction rebellion marchers would go that far.

Hopefully more extreme environmental measures to tackle transportation related pollution will not be necessary. Covid has taught us that we don't always need to be seated at a desk in an office, we can meet and conclude business deals online and don't need to fly across the world just to shake hands, and there are actually some fairly nice places to holiday in the UK, so perhaps there will be a long term reduction in commuting and flights without having to penalise those that need to travel.

Who mentioned a complete ban on air travel? I suggested 90% of aircraft be removed from the skies. That figure was meant to include the vast quantity of holiday makers and "businessmen" that fly here, there and everywhere for "meetings" that could easily be done over the phone or using Skype and not as an excuse for a mini-break at the companys (and by extension, the customers) expense.

Air freight is a necessity these days. We no longer manufacture enough in this country to make ourselves totally self-sufficient but the same can be said for almost all countries.
However a lot of it could be moved to sea and maybe even land-based freight. I don't share your optimistic views on the HS2, i think it will go down in history as an enormous pink elephant (that's like a white elephant but worse because you have to be hallucinating to see any benefit from it) and will do nothing more than put a scar across the country that can be seen from outer space with no benefit to anyone in the long run.

[biggbn]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

You're half right, it's not a comparison at all! It was a simple question.





Allelujah! I was fairly certain you'd get it George! Glad you proved me right too!

The point is, go back to when the global lockdown first started and air travel was severely curtailed (good choice of words George! ) our air pollution levels dropped radically.

Nothing to do with reduced car usage although that just increased the effect.

Think back to the Norwegian Volcano which caused a global no-fly zone.

Almost overnight there was a dramatic improvement in air quality, even in cities where pollution had been a problem from vehicles.
Even the weather improved instantly, not a coincidence but because the weather systems up in the sky weren't being disrupted the way they normally are with all the aircraft flying around.
Yes the planet is tilting closer to the sun at the moment which is also giving strange weather phenomena (snow in Australia for example) but take 90% on the aircraft out of the sky and pollution globally will be reduced radically almost instantly.

This will have other knock-on benefits too. For example, it will make it harder for viruses from abroad to travel back to the UK to a populus that isn't used to them and have little or no resistance to them. Don't forget this is a two-way thing, viruses common here but not in other countries won't be able to travel so quickly and easily to those countries either.

Freddie Laker has a lot to answer for!

The whole point of this apparent digression is that the 60mph limit is nothing more than virtue signalling. It is the govt doing "something" to say they're "tackling pollution" but it's nothing more than smoke and mirrors and a further incursion on our freedom.

Virtue signalling?


Only when the last tree has been cut down, the last fish been caught, and the last stream poisoned, will we realize we cannot eat money.

Cree Indian Prophecy

[pinballdave]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

Who mentioned a complete ban on air travel?

I believe you asked how I'd feel if I "could no longer use air travel?"

"no longer use" equates to "complete ban". Something that is not a complete ban equates to still being able to use.

I fully agree with your sentiments on cutting down air travel though.

Despite you hyperbolic 'scar visible from outer space'*, I differ in that I think that proper high speed rail is a good substitute for air travel and is worth the investment. A lot of Brits are generally put off rail projects by the complete shambles experienced on our current rail system, but I'm hoping that this will be our chance of breaking from tradition and doing rail properly.

* I challenge you to spot HS1 when looking at a photo of Kent taken from space, you might think you can see it, but it's probably just the M20.

[green van man]

The phrase, For the greater good, is one that should be heard with terror by all right thinking individuals.

It is almost without exception the phrase used by tyrants, whether elected or otherwise, to impose restrictions and remove rights from the peoples.

An innocuous phrase that would seem to be a common sense approach to a problem. BUT, be warned unless you closely define, Good, as in who's good, how much good and for how long good, and common as in who is common, what sections of society are excluded from the common. You may well find yourself deprived of rights that you believe inailiable.

All too often the common good refers to the elites and ruling classes, while the masses pay the price.

Paul.

[biggbn]

Originally Posted by green van man

The phrase, For the greater good, is one that should be heard with terror by all right thinking individuals.

It is almost without exception the phrase used by tyrants, whether elected or otherwise, to impose restrictions and remove rights from the peoples.

An innocuous phrase that would seem to be a common sense approach to a problem. BUT, be warned unless you closely define, Good, as in who's good, how much good and for how long good, and common as in who is common, what sections of society are excluded from the common. You may well find yourself deprived of rights that you believe inailiable.

All too often the common good refers to the elites and ruling classes, while the masses pay the price.

Paul.

Explain how this action would benefit the elite Paul? It would hurt big oil's pocketbook!!